Path: utzoo!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!bnr-public!schow
From: schow@bnr-public.uucp (Stanley Chow)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Benchmarks (was: Re: A2620)
Message-ID: <600@bnr-fos.UUCP>
Date: 15 Jun 89 20:13:16 GMT
References: <6607@dayton.UUCP> <41426@bbn.COM>
Sender: news@bnr-fos.UUCP
Reply-To: schow%BNR.CA.bitnet@relay.cs.net (Stanley Chow)
Distribution: na
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Lines: 26
Summary:
Followup-To:
Keywords:

In article <41426@bbn.COM> denbeste@bbn.com (Steven Den Beste) writes:
>Generally speaking, I've found that technical people divide into the
>Intel-philes and the Motorola-philes. The correlation isn't 1.0, but I've found
>that more often than not an Intel-phile is an EE and a Motorola-phile is a
>programmer. The Intel chips have always been more friendly to EE's, and the
>8086 is no exception. There the designers didn't have to emulate anything, and
>they did a nice job. 
>

I had always thought the same thing. Then I started to work with the latest
processor chips from both companies. I think Intel has learnt to make their
chips more friendly to programmers (at least to OS types). It is not clear
to me if Motorola cares about friendliness to either EE or programmers.

Before people flame me for being anti-Motorola, note that I have not specified
any particular feature of any processor. You can flame me for not listing
specific features but don't tell me I am wrong. Don't bother to ask me to list
details because I won't. The only thing I can suggest is to look at the spec of
the 88K and try to build a really faster system with lots of cache and lots of
SRAM. (It is public information that we are building a 88K system).


Stanley Chow        BitNet:  schow@BNR.CA
BNR		    UUCP:    ..!psuvax1!BNR.CA.bitnet!schow
(613) 763-2831		     ..!utgpu!bnr-vpa!bnr-fos!schow%bnr-public
I am just a small cog in a big machine. I don't represent nobody.